Can hudud be carried out fairly amid alleged arbitrary arrests?

Question

Accepted Answer

Doubts Raised on Fair Implementation of Hudud Amidst Allegations of Arbitrary Arrests

Concerns have been voiced regarding the potential for fair implementation of hudud, the Islamic penal code, in Malaysia, given alleged inconsistencies and questionable actions by law enforcement and judicial bodies. These doubts stem from observations of disparate treatment in arrests and investigations, leading to questions about the impartiality of the institutions tasked with upholding justice. The current state of public institutions is seen by some as a prerequisite for considering the implementation of any form of Shariah criminal law.
Inconsistent Enforcement Practices

Allegations of inconsistent attitudes among Malaysia's law enforcers and judiciary have been raised, casting doubt on their capacity to administer hudud fairly. This perspective highlights a contrast between the swift apprehension of opposition figures and activists, often ordered by the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar, and the perceived slower pace in investigating threats of death and rape against a broadcast presenter who had voiced criticism of hudud. The arrest of DAP colleague Tony Pua over a tweet critical of the police force has been cited as an example of an arbitrary action by law enforcement.
Questionable Judicial Credibility

The credibility of the judiciary has also been brought into question, particularly following the Federal Court's decision in February to uphold the conviction and five-year jail sentence of Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. This ruling has been presented as evidence that the institution's independence and impartiality may be compromised, raising further concerns about its ability to ensure justice under any legal framework, including hudud. The continued rise in deaths within police custody, juxtaposed with increased arrests of opposition politicians and activists, adds to this perception of systemic issues.
Need for Institutional Overhaul

A strong argument has been made that the priority should be on overhauling public institutions to ensure that justice and the rule of law are consistently delivered before any consideration is given to implementing Shariah criminal law. The assertion is that hudud, or any such enactment, does not inherently solve existing societal problems. Therefore, fixing the fundamental mechanisms of the legal and justice systems is deemed a necessary precursor to introducing more complex legal codes, ensuring they can be applied justly and equitably.
Constitutional and Secular Concerns

The Democratic Action Party (DAP) has consistently opposed the rollout of hudud in Malaysia, asserting that it contravenes the secular nature of the Federal Constitution. This stance is rooted in the principle that the nation's foundational law establishes a secular framework. The implementation of hudud, as proposed by parties like PAS, is seen by the DAP as a breach of this constitutional principle, raising broader questions about the compatibility of such laws within Malaysia's established legal and constitutional order.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Can hudud be carried out fairly amid alleged arbitrary arrests?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

2

0

0

Share with friends